This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Appellate Practice

Jun. 3, 2016

Weekly Appellate Report Podcast #6: Depublication, Batson, Bristol-Meyers

Presiding Justice Anthony Kline reacts to the CASC's depublication rule change, Donald Falk explains what's at stake in a personal jurisdiction-related case up on argument Thursday, and Asst. Head Dep. District Attorney (LA) Bill Woods chats Batson/Wheeler after last week's USSC ruling in Foster v. Chatman

On this week's show, three guests join Brian to consider a range of appellate issues salient this week, including an historic rule change rendered by the state high court, the Batson/Wheeler doctrine in light of a recent USSC ruling, and the potential for personal jurisdiction to run amok, according to one of our guests.

Justice Anthony Kline, of the First Appellate District, will comment on Wednesday's rule change made by the California Supreme Court, which ended a century-old practice wherein intermediate appellate opinions were automatically depublished upon being granted high court review. Justice Kline expresses his long-held support and encouragement of the move, but explains why the change doesn't go far enough.

Deputy District Attorney Bill Woods will next join Brian to discuss any impacts that last week's USSC ruling in Foster v. Chatman, which dealt with race-based jury selection and the Batson/Wheeler doctrine, will have on California practitioners. Mr. Woods trains new deputies on how to avoid the many potential landmines relating to jury selection, and offers a unique insight on the doctrine.

Finally, Donald Falk, of Mayer Brown, discusses a case up for argument Thursday involving the application of personal jurisdiction to a non-resident defendant drug-maker, in a case with non-resident plaintiffs whose harm occurred outside of California. The appellate court sided against the defendant, and Mr. Falk discusses why that ruling got it wrong, and previews how the state high court might feel differently. As always, CLE credit is available for your having listened to the podcast. Find the link below to take a short test and receive your hour of credit.

Brian Cardile

Rulings Editor, Podcast Host, 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reporter

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390

Send a letter to the editor: